Do me a favor, guys? Read her post. Reread these points that she makes at the end:

A brief conversation is not an opportunity to try your luck.

When someone moves away from an overture you are making? You are done.

When someone indicates something you have said makes them uncomfortable and then turns their back on you? You are done.

When someone turns to you and tells you in no uncertain terms that you are not to touch them again and moves off at speed? You are so incredibly done.

And when you have offended a woman with boundary-crossing behavior, you do not get to choose how you apologize.

If a woman has indicated you are unwelcome (see above, but also including but not limited to: lack of eye contact, moving away from you, looking for other people around you, trying to wrap up the conversation), and especially if a woman has told you in any way, to any degree, that you are unwelcome, your apology is YOU, VANISHING.

And understand that your intentions don’t matter here. The fact that you think you’re a nice guy doesn’t matter. The fact that you’re sure you’d never actually assault a woman doesn’t matter. The fact that you don’t think you’re harassing or stalking someone doesn’t matter.

Yeah, it sucks when someone says you’re making them uncomfortable. You feel hurt. You feel misunderstood. But your hurt feelings don’t justify the continued violation of someone else’s boundaries. If you’re feeling hurt, go talk to a friend. Go vent in a locked LJ post. What you don’t do is keep harassing the other person to try to change their mind, nor do you get to argue and tell them why their feelings are wrong.

If you actually care about the fact that this person feels uncomfortable, and you want them to stop feeling that way? Change the behavior that’s making them feel uncomfortable.

Such important points. None of us gets to decide what makes another person uncomfortable, or what offends them. This is a good reminder to all, and a necessary lecture for some.

KelJul 17, 2012 @ 11:06:21

The fact that you think you’re a nice guy doesn’t matter.

Just as a side note: If you’re not capable of respecting someone’s “stop talking to me” you’re not a nice guy, no matter how deluded your mother is; you are, in fact, a jerk. You are the social equivalent of that crazy guy on the corner screaming about the apocalypse.

Nice guys are considerate. Nice guys are respectful. Nice guys understand the boundaries of the people they are talking to (and remember them). Nice guys ask before hugging someone they’ve just met. Nice guys even get told “yes, a hug is acceptable” because the woman they are talking to isn’t worried about the hug being inappropriate. Nice guys may be disappointed by not getting a hug, but they get over it.

I know that there are some weird social conventions about cons generally… but that doesn’t excuse everyone from understanding that the normal social conventions should still be respected. (Girl-geeks can be just as clueless as boy-geeks.)

Oh, YES. This reminds me of one of my favorite college professors. He taught calculus and had noticed that a number of his math major men didn’t seem to really understand social cues, so he would give these little lessons in appropriate behavior at the start or end of class. The most memorable was “If she doesn’t KNOW you’re walking her back to her dorm, and agree to it, it’s called STALKING, guys.”

And he wasn’t just talk, he would take guys aside for a little chat if he saw anything like that happening, or would touch base with the girl to see if she was comfortable or needed someone to step in. He did it for me – and taught me probably the best lessons I’ve ever had on defending my boundaries, even from nice guys who mean no harm (but are becoming super creepy).

Ms. EliseJul 17, 2012 @ 19:18:48

TW for assault fears/violence/stalking

This makes me want to cry. I know, first-hand, how very scary these behaviors can be, because a “friend” subjected me to them for over a year. I don’t know why I called him a friend that long, but oh well. I know, with absolute certainty, that he thinks he never did anything wrong, and was just being a “nice guy” and waiting until I changed my crazy liberal ways, got rid of my then-boyfriend, and decided to make a huge family with him.

If you have ever engaged in any behaviors at all close to those described above, you need to stop. This instant. I’m lucky I had my boyfriend and roommate to help me cover and make sure I was never alone, but several days we couldn’t leave our apartment because the guy was pacing near the only way out, between us and our cars. My boyfriend, who has a black belt (now two of them, one second degree) felt the need to bring all of his weapons to our apartment, so that we could be prepared because the other guy was known to own (and use) guns. This wasn’t a light decision, but even with my boyfriend and roommate I didn’t feel safe, and they agreed I wasn’t.

I still freeze in fear whenever I see someone with the same coloring, height and weight, hair, or walk as that guy – maybe once a month now, but almost daily at first. I had nightmares, I had hysterics, I had to block him from all my contact info and he still tried to contact me. For all I know, he’s forgotten about what happened, but I can tell you, I never will.

When I say, “Please leave me alone,” or, “Please go away,” or, “I don’t want to talk to you,” or “Why are you following me?” this is your cue to GO AWAY and never come back.

This is NOT your cue to start insulting me, swearing at me, and/or threatening me.

ChatayaJul 17, 2012 @ 21:45:47

Also, it’s not cool to ask a woman who she is with, repeatedly; ask why her husband isn’t here, and think it’s ok to move in when told “he doesn’t like these conventions, but that’s ok.” freaking clueless, some people.

While calling me “sweetie” and touching me. Barf. If dude hadn’t left me alone, I would have kneed him in the nuts, in front of all of ComicCon.

I told him this was verbal abuse. He told me he was ‘joking’ and I had no sense of humor. I linked him to a number of websites on domesic abuse that clearly stated telling someone ‘they had no sense of humor’ in response to abuse was… more abuse.

He said people verbally abused him and I should put up with it because he does. I think this would have been less disturbing if I hadn’t heard a woman say exactly the same thing about her brother raping her children.

No more excuses for these people. They ARE abusers. They need to be told they are abusers. Not that its unacceptable, not that they made someone uncomfortable. They need to be told they are abusers. The label needs to be on the one committing the crime.

KennethJul 17, 2012 @ 22:19:59

With all respect and sensitivity, I must point out that these senarios work in the opposite direction as well. I have had unwanted advances from women before, one in which a lady at a con came up to me and without warning stuck her tongue in my ear. When I objected, she called me a “fag”. I am not gay; my rebuffing the advances of a woman simply means that I do not have an interest in every woman that wants to put the moves on me. It works both ways, dear readers.

katieJul 17, 2012 @ 22:20:22

I think the one slight point where I would disagree with what she seems to be saying is that there is no form of acceptable apology other than the immediate departure of the offending person. I think it’s perfectly acceptable for a person, upon realizing they have committed an offense, to make a second contact to express sincere apology. Once. However, she is right that one does not have the right to choose what form of apology is acceptable. And if one guesses wrong… tough.

One must always keep in mind that the ability to apologize is a mercy, granted ONLY by the sufferance of the person who was wronged. The better one realizes this, the more likely one is to make one’s apology acceptable.

MadGastronomerJul 17, 2012 @ 22:27:25

Kenneth, that’s what’s known as a “BUT WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ?!” argument. Yes, of course, nearly anything that can happen to a woman can also happen to a man. But this kind of harassment happens far, far more commonly to women than to men — to the point where I don’t know any women who haven’t had something like this happen, but most of the men I know have not. Bringing up that OMG IT HAPPENS TO MENZ, TOO! is a derailment. It is an attempt to distract from the reality that this mostly happens to women, and an attempt to steer the conversation away from how to handle it and what to do about it. We know it happens to men, too. It isn’t germane to the conversation.

Well, sure. Case in point – see my blog post from last week. And it’s absolutely true that this sort of harassment can happen to anyone, and that it’s utterly unacceptable no matter who’s doing it.

That said, it’s also true that the vast majority of the time it’s men choosing to harass and stalk women. I think it’s very important to recognize that dynamic, and to acknowledge things like this is a problem caused primarily by men, yet we continue to put the bulk of the responsibility on women to do something about it.

Sigh. It blows my mind that this stuff even needs to be said, and yet there are so many people out there who just don’t get it…

MadGastronomerJul 18, 2012 @ 03:21:18

The problem with this, though, is that any attempt at contact is probably going to continue to make the person uncomfortable. A good apology requires that you stop doing whatever it is that you have to apologize for, and since contacting them when they don’t want to be contacted is exactly what the apology is for, doing so actually negates the apology. So I gotta say no, no contacting for apologies. Maybe, big maybe, much later, weeks or months or years, by mentioning it to someone who knows them, that you’re very sorry to have done it, and you’ll go right back to leaving them alone now, or something, but that’s as close as I can get. But it’s not ok to continue to force contact on someone who’s already said they don’t want you contacting them (verbally or not) just to make yourself feel better — and that’s the only thing this kind of apology is likely to achieve.

katieJul 18, 2012 @ 07:52:13

I disagree; I think that if you TRULY get how big a jerk you’ve been, then you will naturally be able to display disarming body language so that you no longer appear a threat. You’ll know to approach her where there are witnesses and where she has an escape, and not to crowd her – or even that in many cases it’s better better to send an emissary (or letter) to say, “See my friend over there? He realized he’s been a jerk and he’s sorry and he’ll leave you alone.” And I personally would prefer to have the peace of mind that the creep at least seems to be sincere in leaving me alone, rather than looking over my shoulder constantly for several more months or years.

And if you don’t really, truly understand, you aren’t ready to make an apology yet. For instance, the creep in the linked blog post was certainly not.

I would say that if you truly understand what you’ve been told, then you will respect the boundaries that have been set.

Who is the apology for? Is it for the person who said they want you to stay away and stop talking to them and following them? If so, you’re violating that boundary in order to tell them you’re sorry for violating that boundary.

More often, it seems like the apology in this case is for the person who committed the offense, as a way to either feel better about themselves or to try to show that, “Hey look, I’m really a nice guy, see?” In which case their needs don’t trump the needs of the person wanting to be left alone.

MadGastronomerJul 18, 2012 @ 08:05:06

Except, again, if the person who’s been harassed just wants the harasser to stay away, then no matter how he approaches her, it’s going to be upsetting to her. Why should she have to put up with him approaching her at all, in any way, even if to apologize.

I have had to tell many people to go away and leave me alone. It upsets me when they don’t respect that in any way, when they try to come back to apologize or to try to make amends, or say something “nice”. It doesn’t matter. They’re still violating the boundary I set. Period. I shouldn’t have to deal with that, ever. They should respect my stated boundary.

If you want an apology when someone treats you badly, then you can ask for one if the default is to leave people alone, but if the default is to come up and apologize, then it’s a lot harder for me to maintain my boundaries.

KelJul 18, 2012 @ 09:20:41

The thing that really blows my mind is that these are probably the same people who were up at arms for taking a minor approval rating hit in a video game for turning down the advances of a male character stating that “this never happens”.

BSJul 18, 2012 @ 09:27:33

Unfortunately, many feel that once you have allowed and accepted their apology, this “justifies” their behavior and you are saying it’s okay for them to continue in that behavior because they are now “entitled” to be part of your life..

Simon McNeilJul 18, 2012 @ 10:45:04

And, a note from another recent con, when a panel on online communication turns to the issue of cyber-stalking don’t whip out a picture of your GF from half a century ago and exclaim with passion that despite her changing her name you’ll find her some day.

I would think that if one realizes one has made another uncomfortable to the point that the other says, “Please leave me alone,” the most appropriate response would be: “I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to make you uncomfortable,” and then to go away.

No trying to justify oneself. No trying to approach the offended party later to apologize. Just “I’m sorry” and then leave. An apology and respecting the other’s boundaries all in one.

Joris MJul 18, 2012 @ 17:50:08

There is a big discussion going on at the moment in the (US) skeptic community on the implementation of anti-harassment policies and procedures during their cons and meetings. Which I encounter every now and then while reading blogs. It is mindboggling to read that there is a large group claiming there is no problem, and people know how to behave, and as a result clear rules and procedures are not needed. Even though incidents as this one seem to happen there as well.

If it’s not a problem affecting lots and lots of men, then it’s not a real problem, right? [/Bitter Sarcasm]

Sigh.

KelJul 19, 2012 @ 10:41:39

If someone has to apologize for not stopping talking when told to, for not leaving when told to, and/or for continuing a conversation topic they have been told is uncomfortable, they do not posses the social skills to judge if their apology is appropriate and should simply leave.

Your point is very valid – anyone can accidentally enter a topic that their conversational partner doesn’t wish to talk about. The appropriate response is to apologize immediately and change the subject. If this is not done immediately, the speaker obviously doesn’t understand, and any belated apology is merely ignoring the other person’s stated wishes and returning to the offensive topic.

SusanJul 19, 2012 @ 16:47:36

Totally clueless. Totally scary. This reminds me of the Margaret Atwood/Gavin de Becker quote: “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.”

MadGastronomerJul 20, 2012 @ 02:01:18

Actually, there’s quite a bit of evidence going around that the man who harassed Ms. Valentine was not clueless, but was intentionally using pick-up artist techniques on her. He’s know to do this, and several people have come forward to say so. He also actively works against con harassment policies.

The automatic assumption in geek circles always seems to be that a harasser just doesn’t know he’s doing anything wrong. It’s often not true, though. A lot of these men are either actively studying PUA tactics, or have been told repeatedly that their behavior is creepy and unacceptable and refuse to change their behavior.

I’m not saying we should automatically assume they’re doing it knowingly, but I am saying we shouldn’t automatically assume they’re not.

KelJul 20, 2012 @ 10:40:56

A lot of these men are either actively studying PUA tactics, or have been told repeatedly that their behavior is creepy and unacceptable and refuse to change their behavior.

Ugh. I usually prefer to know rather than not, but there’s a part of me that really wishes I could remain blissfully unaware. I’m of the “start with the assumption that people are acting out of ignorance, not malice” school of thought.

LauraJul 20, 2012 @ 11:52:54

*double facepalm*

LauraJul 20, 2012 @ 11:57:57

“The automatic assumption in geek circles always seems to be that a harasser just doesn’t know he’s doing anything wrong.”

That drives me crazy. The “oh, that’s just so-and-so being so-and-so” holds no water with me. I’m tired of sheltering so-and-sos, and I’m sorry, but their little habits aren’t just fanciful quirks, they’re creepy stalker behaviors and they need to stop.

JoelJul 20, 2012 @ 17:20:31

Well said sensei Jim.

Homa SapiensJul 26, 2012 @ 16:25:25

So was Genevieve Valentine, in the first place.

Homa SapiensJul 26, 2012 @ 16:29:04

Holy shit, that’s scary.

Homa SapiensJul 26, 2012 @ 16:31:37

It’s a large group of men. Who are FURIOUS when names are named.

Fred DavisJul 27, 2012 @ 10:52:39

It’s not just geek circles, that’s the classic “fear of an unshamed slut” rhetorical maneuver – where the full onus of responsibility for victimisation is placed upon the victims, along with various framing techniques to remove all responsibility from the victimiser, so for instance if a women gets drunk and is raped by a drunk man, well clearly it’s her fault for getting drunk but NOT his fault at all for raping her, because he was drunk and thus couldn’t control himself.

Thus, wherever there are creeps, there you will find someone exploring the possibility that just perhaps or maybe there is some reason to explain how the creep cannot truly be blamed for his creepiness, while at the same time anybody else, via subliminal memetics purposely woven into their aesthetics, pheremone cocktails or telepathic radiations (any of which the creeped on must be more careful about tut tut) will REALLY be to blame for the creepiness, because goddammit, they must have done something to force the poor simpleton in question into action!

Quoting Laura Resnick:
“When I say, “Please leave me alone,” or, “Please go away,” or, “I don’t want to talk to you,” or “Why are you following me?” this is your cue to GO AWAY and never come back.”

Speaking for myself, sometimes when I say go away it’s because I have a headache and I want to be left alone. It is possible (for me at least) to say ‘please leave me alone right now’ to someone who I don’t wish to banish or ostracize for all eternity. However, I would agree that if someone asks to be left alone, contact should be re-initiated (if it ever is) solely by that person.

After all, what if someone tries to strike up a conversation with you about a mutual interest while you are with some friends, you ask said person to leave, but 20 years later you need to do business with said person? It is perfectly permissible for you to resume contact, and tell said person that you will communicate on strictly business matters.

KelJul 28, 2012 @ 14:05:08

You’re splitting hairs. There is a difference between “Please leave me alone” and “Please leave me alone right now.” The second instance is clearly an indication of “check back later”. The first indicates that the behavior patterns you are using are unwelcome. So, if you are flirting and the first is used, you should under no circumstances attempt to return to flirting unless the other party initiates. In the second, you can try again later.

Likewise, asking a person to stop talking to you indicates that in this situation they are unwelcome. If I ask you to stop calling me about making a donation, for example, I mean “stop asking for a donation” not “never speak to me again you wretched human”. Similarly, being asked to stop talking about a trigger topic means “don’t bring up this topic, it makes me uncomfortable” and means “don’t ever bring up this topic ever” not “try again tomorrow or next year or in ten years”.

Also, if someone says “stop talking to me” with no other qualifiers you can immediately assume that the interest isn’t actually mutual.

JaneJul 30, 2012 @ 02:23:05

You seem to have a quite an inordinate amount of your time invested in pea-cocking just how progressive you are.

Joe KlemmerJul 31, 2012 @ 18:16:31

This is tangentially related to this topic but might be oof interest to some.

It’s interesting that, IRL, I’m rarely, if ever, considered creepy or a stalker (most women find me to be strange but harmless). But online, especially on Twitter with its char limit, I’m offending people left and right. Even if I use the exact same words in both places.

Over the decades I’ve come to see that the problem is there’s no nonverbal feedback online. One can say something completely innocuous but, if the reader attributes a particular vocal tone of sarcasm or even anger, the reaction is completely off base. I see this when women post simple, informational messages and then get attacked for being insulting or even flirting by guys. And how many flame wars have started because one person or other “read between the lines” about what the original poster was REALLY saying.

This is why I always recommend everyone try and read all online correspondence with the vocal tone and inflection of their dear loving mother (or some similar loved one). This can really cut down on the accidental torchings.

Cat SittingstillAug 01, 2012 @ 10:41:19

Yeah–I don’t say a problem with –right when you are told to leave–saying “I’m sorry; I will leave you alone” right before you turn around and walk away and leave them be for the rest of the con.

But if you didn’t get to that at the time, you missed your chance, and you don’t get to re-approach.

And if they forgive you later and want to be friends–believe me, they will let you know. You don’t need to check back periodically–*they* handle re-establishing contact. Not you.

DensityDuckAug 01, 2012 @ 13:20:58

Lots of people read posts like this and are all, “but how will I ever talk to a girl?”

Well, if she wants to talk to you, she’ll talk to you.

“But no girls ever talk to me!”

Well, that’s just how it’s gonna be.

“But what if no girl ever wants to talk to me?!?!”

Well, that’s just how it’s gonna be. Creepy men do not get to initiate conversations. Be less creepy and you’ll get somewhere.

Judy in SATXAug 02, 2012 @ 13:50:08

You would prefer he not support Ms Valentine? or that he not speak out against harassment?

Judy – I believe this is a follow-up troll from my Reddit post, though I could be mistaken. (I rather like the word choice of “pea-cocking,” though.)

HeatherAug 23, 2012 @ 13:03:33

You can rephrase that last point of your as ‘give the most generous vocal tone and inflection’ in order to make the same point without all that gender bs.

HeatherAug 23, 2012 @ 13:05:47

Or you could talk to a girl without hitting on her. No part of me understands why it’s hard for anyone to grasp this.

Joe KlemmerAug 23, 2012 @ 15:07:04

That’s a very strange response. How did you get “all that gender bs” from the concept of maternal love? Most of the human race (of all genders) has a special kind of relationship with their mothers. One that engenders positive and safe feelings. Now, this is not 100% universal of course, which is why I included the phrase, “or some similar loved one.” A phrase that is gender neutral.

I’m not knocking you on this. I am just confused by the comment, that’s all.

HeatherAug 23, 2012 @ 15:42:10

Actually you *are* knocking me by starting off your reply with “that’s a strange response” not ‘I don’t see where you’re seeing the gender bs’ or ‘I don’t get what you’re saying’ – you’ve said my perspective is strange, which implies there’s something wrong with it. You could have just said you were confused by my response without imply there’s anything wrong with what I said.

As for ‘all that gender bs’:

Maternal love is a specifically gendered thing – the love of a mother; a similar loved one might be an aunt, a grandmother; some other female relative. But you’ve specifically stated a female role which carries all sorts of implications of being forgiving, putting aside yourself for another, etc. If you want to go for gender neutral why not use parental or familial?

Joe KlemmerAug 23, 2012 @ 17:15:50

This is a good example of my original post. You are assuming meanings and interpretations to my words that aren’t there.

1) The phrase “That’s a very strange response” is relatively simple. It means that your response to my original post, WRT to gender, was quite unexpected by, and confusing for, me. Much the same way that the phrase “That’s a very odd response” or, as you said, “I don’t get what you’re saying” mean. It seems that you assigned specific, limited meaning to the word strange. Whereas the word carries the more general definition listed as 1 and/or 4 in the dictionary (see Dictionary.com).

2) While a mothers love is usually quite gender specific, there is no reason to assume that “similar loved one” carries any gender implications at all. The similarity aspect is connected to the word love and not the specific familial reference. For myself, the first loved one that will always come to mind following mother is father. Your limiting the words “loved one” to the female gender is a little misandristic, don’t you think?

And, for the sake of clarity, while my first reply should be read with a slightly surprised but sincerely open and questioning voice, this one should be read with a touch of annoyance, though only a slight touch. It is exasperating when others use their own biases and prejudices to assume and interject meaning into others words.

Still, as I said at the beginning of this post, this exchange is a good example of how one can glean nonexistent meaning from a text only communication medium.

Brenda GerritsmaSep 14, 2012 @ 06:21:19

Actually, she’s reading meanings and interpretations into your words *you may not have intended*. But your words don’t exist in a vacuum- they exist in this society, where some of those words hold socially common meanings regardless of how you intend them, and so those meanings and interpretations are *still there*.

‘Strange’ has connotations of ‘wrongness’ and carries that potential connotation whenever it is used unless the context specifically excludes it, even when you meant it strictly as only certain of the different definitions it can carry. And in context, by taking yourself out of the sentence you give the whole sentence a connotation of being outside of you… as in a connotation not of “I find your response strange’ (ie. “I am confused by its unexpectedness.”), but rather “This is a universally strange thing.” (ie. This is a response that people find strange.)

She also appears to be, not limiting the possible similar loved ones to only female, but pointing out that your phrasing leads to that as a possible, even likely interpretation of your words. By using the world love in both “dear loving mother” and “similar loved ones” you cause the word ‘similar’ to be more likely interpreted as connected to ‘mother’ than to ‘love’, as connecting it to ‘love’ would be redundant (when the next word is already ‘loved’). Also, ‘similar’ and other comparative adjectives are more commonly read as connected to the noun in both cases, not the noun (loved ones) in one case and the adjective (loving) in the other.

Since you also gendered your leading example with a specific type of relationship that holds specific stereotypical and gendered connotations in our society (if not universally, then at least commonly) you, apparently inadvertently, contextualized your statement as gendered and stereotyped where gender is irrelevant to the point. And *that* is the “gender BS” (or ‘non-gender neutral language used when gender isn’t relevant to the point’).

And as you’re quite correct, there are no non-verbal cues, it’s best to assume when *writing* that ALL those meanings and interpretations may come into play in the minds of your readers, and express yourself accordingly. You are not responsible for how others interpret your words, but you also can’t dictate it, only give them as clear a path as possible to the interpretation you *meant*.

…I can’t quite do the “the vocal tone and inflection” of my mother, though. She finds North Americans eye-rollingly weird in their attitudes and doing so would lead me to reading people’s posts ALL kinds of wrong! 😀

And I probably couldn’t get the accent right…

Joe KlemmerSep 15, 2012 @ 18:00:28

That is a well thought out response, Brenda. I understand your perspective and there’s nothing inherently wrong with it.

Side note: I have to agree with your mother. I’ve been in the US for 24 years now and still find it slightly odd.

But to the point of interpreting/assigning intent to words, this is more about the reader then the writer. A good writer can adapt their style to compensate for this. However, I’m just a guy who bangs on the keyboard (usually coding for some program or website). The fundamental basis for this phenomenon is that, as humans, we will usually assign to others the emotions, feelings, biases, and intent that we, ourselves, would have towards others in a similar situation.

An example of this might be when someone is constantly accuses their partner of cheating on them when they are the ones actually cheating. A real world example is my brother. He hates everything that is not 100% in line with his thoughts and beliefs. Many people also feel this way. But he is inclined to violently verbally lash out at people, events and even TV commercials. This has led to him going into full out defense mode when someone says something as innocuous as hello. (And no, I am not making this up nor exaggerating).

Another real world example is the firestorm when “The Hunger Games” movie came out. Even though the book describes a character of color, how many people went ballistic when an actress of color portrayed the character? We see only what we choose to see.

Unless written words blatantly, expressly, unambiguously, unequivocally, state an emotion and/or underlying intent, the onus is on the reader if they are offended by something they read. If one is looking to be offended, one will invariably be offended.